Here’s to hoping Pt. III
Until this morning when my sister sent me an e-mail, I’ve yet to be mildly convinced with substantive reasons as to why to vote for Obama.
stay hungry, stay foolish
Until this morning when my sister sent me an e-mail, I’ve yet to be mildly convinced with substantive reasons as to why to vote for Obama.
Well, as a long time independent, and one who won’t vote for the lesser of two evil, but instead actually use his vote and vote his conscience, I’m not that sold on Obama, but nor am I on Clinton. I’d vote for Obama over Clinton however, not that my opinion even registers in your little world any longer.
Here’s my point, however…. I can’t vote Republican. I just can’t. I see folly in that. I can’t vote Clinton, I see her as a career politician who will cut deals, do what it takes to get reelected (not a good way to spend your first 4 years) and then force thru policies on the backend. Obama I think will do a lot of the same, but I think that he has a little bit more of a pure heart and a little bit more of the future on his mind. It’s not simply about Bush is wrong, the war is wrong, we can fix this, give me four years. With him, he wants to change some of the education laws and instill tax credits for COLLEGE students. That means, you can go to college and not come out 25k in debt. You can get a Masters without having to give up life. Teachers will be educated and paid. Think of your high school teachers (the ones that made a difference in your life) and think of them now, with a livable wage and motivation to actually teach, and not just prepare you for the damned HSEE or NCLB exams. They can actually do their job.
Meandering in all that is that the future relies on the young. On educating them, preparing them, and giving them the tools needed to become the next crop of Americans and so far the only person I’ve heard talk about any of this, to address it and want not only for his/her own campaign and 4 years, but also for the future is Obama. I don’t know if someone willing to look beyond themselves to the generations to come means anything to you, but it’s a pretty compelling argument to me. Health care, the war, the economy… all well and good, but once you get ‘your’ plan in place, what else are you going to do or change to make things better for me not only now, but also once your gone? Social Security… affects me in 35 years, if not more. The economy… I’ve always done well, saved smart, took care. Sorry you didn’t, but some ownership would be nice and American companies staying here instead of outsourcing, can we really stop that?
It boils down to the future… I think my guy has an eye on that, but I doubt that you (or most others in this country) would even think about a third party, let alone vote for something outside the norm and the daily scope, but my argument, compelling or not, would be for Obama, as he’s more than he seems, more than a 4 year man hoping to make a mark. He’s a futurist, who has a whole lot more interest in Millie the student and future leader than Clinton does.
My other compelling argument is that with Nader running, he’ll pull more votes from Clinton that Obama and if it’s Clinton v McCain, with Nader in the mix, we’ll get at least 4 more years of Republicans. Nader in the mix with Obama v McCain, I think Obama wins. So, ousting Rep control is my secondary argument. Hope you’re well.
Hallelujah to the blurb with extreme political concentration!
I am now full-on HC, and I wanted to share with you the quote that helped convince me.
“Her early nineties headband was girlish, of course, but it also called to mind a particular kind of young woman – one who sees herself as serious, disdainful of frivolous subjects.. There was studied idealism in that headband, She was going to save the world and she needed to keep her hair out of her eyes in order to do it.”
Ooohh, it reeks feminism! I love that Hill was some diamond in the rough. Even though I doubt the validity of femi-nazi’s in general, this one was especially striking and I thought you would enjoy that. But gurl, every blog you’ve blogged for the past… two months, more or less, have been some-type of mention (subtle, sly, or otherwise) of this damn political campaign. Really, Millie. Really. Only you could blog exclusively on C++ and shoring up votes for proposition whatever it was. Remember the good ol’ days? All introspective and full of questions always left unanswered (the blog I’m referencing is “Holy, 500+ views!”) Gimme some SJP, MT!
Anyways, showing some l.u.v. to my favorite host blog in the world. Hope all is well with the Bruins! Please give me a call if you’re in town – rides to the airport at no charge. Thanks for making me a part of the fittingly elite (Heh. Punny.).
M-
I was reading an article about baseball this morning and in it, the writer, Peter Gammons, was talking about the supposed value of a player dependent on their age, career averages, if the numbers are trending up or down, those kind of things. The end of it, when he was talking about Torii Hunter and his intangibles, that’s why I’m here…. He said that he is worth it because he brings hope to the team, that his numbers and age dictate a lower salary, but the intangibles make him worth it. Now (you must be wondering) what does this have to do with me or my blog?!?!
This is a quote and I wanted to share.
“There are numbers that will quantify what Hunter is or isn’t worth, just as there are politicians who try to tell us that “experience” is far more important than the foundation of hope and potential.”
I like that. Just as I have disliked for years, politicians telling me about their “experience”. Clinton speaks of her “experience”. Really, you lived in the White House, you didn’t make the decisions. You and Obama have EXACTLY the same experience at being President; both equal zero. Besides, like I tried to get across yesterday, it’s not about that, not for me, it about the future, the strive for betterment. Not just today, but for the country, the nation, the people in it… hell, for the world. Give me hope, not experience.
I like this LNJ character.
I’m not anywhere as coherent, so here’s a try —
I don’t know if a lot of people feel this way though. Yes, given they both don’t have Presidential experience — but I feel a lot of people will vote for her on this “experience”.
I don’t see much wrong with career politicians, other than that they’re manipulative … and really good at it. Alright. So there’s a whole lot wrong with it, BUT I think she’s willing to do whatever it takes to become President so she can then change the world with her own ideologies. In her autobiography she describes her long fascination with politics and her fervent involvement in politics and the community. She’s made for this. She was born to do this. She’s been a politician for so long that she can’t HELP but be a career politician. I’m just have faith that when all of this blows over — she’ll still stick to the issues. She’ll stick to what she believes in.
There’s this article I’ve been trying to find about theories on voters and how they come to conclusions in politics. I want to find it for you, but the last 15 minutes searching beloved Google proved to no avail. Maybe your tech-y skills will find it?
I don’t know if a lot of people feel this way though. Yes, given they both don’t have Presidential experience — but I feel a lot of people will vote for her on this “experience”.
Sorry, a correction so it’s a little more coherent
*I don’t know if a lot of people feel as if she’s just boasting her confidence. In the box that I’m living in, a lot of people are telling me that they’re afraid to vote for Obama because (1) someone will pull a JFK/Martin Luther King or (2) he lacks the experience needed to even become President.
Of course, NONE of the candidates have Presidential experience .. so that isn’t a valid point.
I don’t know, I just feel like hope is going to get a little old
Stella-
Good points and thanks for the like of me, but here’s what it comes down to for me… JFK, had limited political experience and he was a GREAT President. He was about the future of America, not the future of his candidacy or party, but of America. I see the same in Obama and not Clinton.
As for ‘career politicians’… Haven’t we had about enough of them? Reagan to Bush to Clinton to Bush; When does it stop. When is enough enough? When in it time for a change. I’ve been voting 3rd party as a lack of faith for 4 elections now. When is it that someone is going to step up and actually talk about something that matters. Not some damned stupid war, not what the Republicans are doing to screw it up not about the experience needed, but something REAL! JFK talked about Russia, walking in space, racial equality for America… Not about Korea, WWII, transitioning Europe to be an asset to America in the 60′s but about things that most people hadn’t yet thought or felt or even known was important.
I’d think about giving up my 3rd party vote for Obama, but I’d never do it for Clinton. For people who want what’s good for America, and to get the Republican party out, doesn’t that say more than anything Clinton could? That a large majority of us 3rd partiers would vote Obama but not Clinton. What, Stella, does that tell you? Consider this, before you answer, 12% of CA is unaligned with a political party and not able to/chose not to vote in a primary; A large majority of those same people call themselves 3rd or Green Party. If it came to it, most would vote Nader again, if it were Clinton v McCain. What about Obama v McCain… CA carries a huge number of electoral votes. Just a thought.